The Appellate Tribunal for Electricity dismissed an execution petition filed by the Petitioner to recover the compensation from the respondent. The Tribunal ruled that the Petitioner should have approached the CERC by way of the execution petition for recovery of compensation from the Respondent as the Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the Respondent and upheld the order by CERC and has not given any new order or direction.
Brief Facts:
The Petitioner, a state transmission utility in Rajasthan, filed an Execution Petition under Section 120(3) of the Electricity Act, 2003, seeking enforcement of an order passed by this tribunal. The Respondent owns a wind farm in Rajasthan. The Petitioner had initially filed a petition before the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission (CERC) alleging the Respondent’s violation of regulations and deliberate gaming. The CERC concluded that the Respondent engaged in gaming and directed it to pay compensation for the Petitioner's losses. The Respondent's appeal against this order was dismissed by this Tribunal. The Tribunal, however, raised concerns about the maintainability of the Execution Petition.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
It was contended that Section 120 of the Electricity Act, 2003 states that this tribunal is bound to execute any order made by it as a decree of civil court. It was further contended that since the judgement has been passed by this tribunal, it can be executed only by this tribunal and thus, the execution petition is maintainable.
Observations of the Tribunal:
The Bench stated that it could not be said that Section 120(3) of the Electricity Act, 2003 makes any order passed by this tribunal under the Act executable by the Tribunal as a decree of civil court.
The Tribunal observed that in the present case, the Petitioner is actually and in effect seeking execution/enforcement of the order passed by CERC. This tribunal in its judgment dismissed the appeal filed by the wind power generator i.e. the Respondent against the order of CERC and upheld the same. There were no fresh order or direction has been passed by this Tribunal and the tribunal has neither modified nor reversed the said order of the CERC.
The Tribunal stated that the Petitioner should have approached the CERC by way of the execution petition for recovery of compensation from the respondent as directed in the order.
The decision of the Tribunal:
The Bench dismissed the execution petition as not maintainable before the tribunal and granted liberty to the Petitioner to file the same before the CERC.
Case Title: Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Prasaran Nigam Limited v. Inox Wind Energy Limited
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Sandesh Kumar Sharma, Hon’ble Mr. Virender Bhat
Case No.: Execution Petition No. 4 of 2021
Advocate for the Petitioner: Adv. Mr. Pradeep Misra
Advocates for the Respondent: Advs. Mr. Alok Krishna Agarwal, Mr. Naveen Chawla, Mr. Mayank Bughani
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com:
Picture Source :
